X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_NEUTRAL 	autolearn=no version=3.2.2
Sender: -1.9 (spamval) -- NONE
Return-Path: <jmickens &AElig eecs.umich.edu>
Received: from newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) 	by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l8A1jjux003867 	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) 	for <dreeves &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:45:45 -0400
Received: from guys.mr.itd.umich.edu (mx.umich.edu [141.211.14.135]) 	by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l8A1j8T5001097 	for <dreeves &AElig eecs.umich.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:45:15 -0400
Received: FROM edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu (edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.27]) 	BY guys.mr.itd.umich.edu ID 46E4A1B8.B7B8F.14185 ;  	 9 Sep 2007 21:45:28 -0400
Received: from edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu (localhost.eecs.umich.edu [127.0.0.1]) 	by edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.1/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l8A1jjZC028021; 	Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:45:45 -0400
Received: from localhost (jmickens &AElig localhost) 	by edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) with ESMTP id l8A1jjIv028018; 	Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:45:45 -0400
In-Reply-To: <956637.1116.qm &AElig web52503.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709092132240.27258 &AElig edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu>
References: <956637.1116.qm &AElig web52503.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.2 (2007-07-23) on 	newman.eecs.umich.edu
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.91.2, clamav-milter version 0.91.2 on newman.eecs.umich.edu
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:45:45 -0400 (EDT)
To: cameron wicklow <ckwicklow &AElig sbcglobal.net>
cc: Daniel Reeves <dreeves &AElig umich.edu>, improvetheworld &AElig umich.edu
From: James W Mickens <jmickens &AElig eecs.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: mind the gap

> Generating wealth (producing a good or service) does not hurt any one. 
> If the new product or service is produced more efficiently or is more 
> desirable than the other products on the market, it may change the 
> conditions that other people had been previously exploiting to create 
> wealth.  But, it does not negatively impact another person's current 
> wealth.

This isn't true. For example, wealth-generating factories may create 
pollutants. These pollutants can negatively impact my environmental 
wealth, e.g., if I own a fishery that is downstream of your dumping pipe. 
My ability to grow fish, i.e., my ability to generate wealth, is hurt by 
your ability to make wealth. As another example, generating wealth for 
shareholders may be inversely related to generating wealth for the actual 
workers in the company. If the company produces a more efficient service 
because my wages have been slashed, but this newfound efficiency increases 
the wealth of the stockholders, then I've lost wealth as a result of 
others gaining it.

~j